Poliner v. Texas Health Systems: Confirming Peer Review Immunity

This article addresses the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit’s recent decision in the Poliner case, in which Texas physician Lawrence Poliner filed suit against his employer, a Texas hospital, following his suspension of medical privileges by the hospital’s peer review committee due to alleged “substandard care” of patients. The Fifth Circuit reversed an earlier district court judgment that had awarded Dr. Poliner $366 million in defamation damages, Crisera notes, by reaffirming the peer review immunity provided for by the Health Care Quality Improvement Act (“HCQIA”) of 1986. Crisera explains that the decision, “should provide some comfort to participants in hospitals’ professional peer review processes,” noting that the U.S. Supreme Court has since declined to hear the case. To read the full article, please click here.

HCQIA immunity is limited to money damages. Doctors who are subjected to unjustified or malicious peer review still may seek appropriate injunctive and declaratory relief in the courts. 537 F.3d at 381. The Poliner decision is the result of 10 years of expensive litigation and likely a great personal toll on all involved. The U.S. Supreme Court declined review of the case on January 21, 2009, and denied Dr. Poliner’s request for reconsideration on March 23, 2009. Poliner should provide some comfort to participants in hospitals’ professional peer review processes. As the Fifth Circuit noted: To allow an attack years later upon the ultimate “truth” of judgments made by peer reviewers supported by objective evidence would drain all meaning from the statute. The congressional grant of immunity accepts that few physicians would be willing to serve on peer review committees under such a threat; as our sister circuit explains, “the intent of [the HCQIA] was not to disturb, but to reinforce, the preexisting reluctance of courts to substitute their judgment on the merits for that of health care professionals and of the governing bodies of hospitals in an area within their expertise.” At the least, it is not our role to re-weigh this judgment and balancing of interests by Congress. [Citations omitted.] 537 F.3d at 384-85. In 1986, Congress, concerned about “[t]he increasing occurrence of medical malpractice and the need to improve the quality of medical care,” sought to encourage good faith professional peer review activities and enacted the Health Care Quality Improvement Act (“HCQIA”), 42 U.S.C. 11101 et seq. Congress found, among other things, that “[t]here is an overriding national need to provide incentive and protection for physicians engaging in effective professional peer review” and granted limited immunity from suits for money damages to participants in professional peer review actions. Twenty years later, Poliner v. Texas Health Systems, 537 F.3d 368 (5th Cir. 2008), cert. denied, 129 S. Ct. 1002, reh’g denied, 129 S. Ct. 1663 (2009), confirmed that immunity. In August 2004, Lawrence Poliner, M.D., a board-certified physician in internal medicine and cardiovascular diseases, had certain hospital privileges suspended because of concerns over his care of several patients, including performing an angioplasty on the wrong artery. After a random review of 44 of Dr. Poliner’s cases demonstrated substandard care, the peer review committee recommended summary suspension of his catheterization lab and echocardiography privileges. Dr. Poliner objected to the suspension. After exhausting his procedural rights under the hospital’s bylaws, he sued the hospital and several physicians involved in the peer review process, alleging defamation and other claims. The jury awarded Dr. Poliner $366 million in damages. The district court reduced the award to $33.5 million including pre-judgment interest. The defendants appealed, claiming immunity from monetary damages under HCQIA. The Fifth Circuit agreed and reversed the district court’s judgment. Under HCQIA, a professional peer review action must be taken: (1) in the reasonable belief that the action was in the furtherance of quality health care, (2) after a reasonable effort to obtain the facts of the matter, (3) after adequate notice and hearing procedures are afforded to the physician involved or after such other procedures as are fair to the physician under the circumstances, and (4) in the reasonable belief that the action was warranted by the facts known after such reasonable effort to obtain facts and after meeting the requirement of paragraph (3). A professional review action shall be presumed to have met the preceding standards necessary for [HCQIA immunity] unless the presumption is rebutted by a preponderance of evidence. 42 U.S.C. 11112(a). The Fifth Circuit noted that “the HCQIA’s ‘reasonableness requirements were intended to create an objective standard of performance, rather than a subjective good faith standard.’” 537 F.3d at 377. The focus is not on whether the peer review participants’ beliefs as to the course of care were right, or even whether the participants had bad motives, but rather whether the peer review decision was objectively reasonable looking at the facts available to the participants at the time. 537 F.3d at 379-80. The peer review committee had found substandard care in more than half of the 44 of Dr. Poliner’s cases it reviewed. Thus, the Fifth Circuit found it objectively reasonable for the peer review committee to conclude that restricting Dr. Poliner’s privileges would further quality health care. Id. at 379. Dr. Poliner argued that HCQIA immunity should not apply because the hospital failed to comply with its own bylaws. The court disagreed, holding that “HCQIA immunity is not coextensive with compliance with an individual hospital’s bylaws. Rather, the statute imposes a uniform set of national standards.” 537 F.3d at 380-81. So long as the peer review action meets HCQIA’s requirements, failure to comply with bylaws would not defeat immunity. Id. The court made clear, however, that the Poliner v. Texas Health Systems: Confirming Peer Review Immunity September 2009 The Metropolitan Corporate Counsel Page 49 Jennifer Gannon Crisera WILLIAMS KASTNERPlease email the author at jcrisera@williamskastner.com with questions about this article. Jennifer Gannon Crisera Texas – Law Firms Jennifer Gannon Crisera is an Associate in the Seattle office of Williams Kastner. She focuses on health care law as well as other practices. Document hosted at http://www.jdsupra.com/post/documentViewer.aspx?fid=87981af0-889e-4234-b42e-9cf07d6908fc

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

- hide

Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.